Author

Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 327. (Read 771542 times)

sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
When I first invested in this company I was aware of the potential to earn divs from mining, but actually it was the profit from hardware sales that I thought was most exciting.

So any thoughts on why this has changed?


The other aspect to it is that the sale of mining equipment gives you immediate USD funds whereas putting that machine on the farm gives you that money over a period - let's say 2 months.

As an example we could have a miner retailing at 25kUSD which cost 5k to make. An instant sale would net us 20kUSD profit giving us 10k for divs and 10k for reinvest fund. Crucially that reinvest 10k is available a short time after the miner is assembled. However if we put that machine on the farm the 10k for reinvest might not materialise for 2months. Obviously that 2month delay effects how quickly we can order more chips and miner components. In that example, if we are trying to grow the business quickly then the sale of the miner does us the best service. And ofcourse BTC could fall dramatically meaning the miner on the farm never makes payback and so we never get the 10k to reinvest.

So clearly from that I would say we need to:

SELL miners for the reinvest money
PUT MINERS ON FARM for long-term divs

We need to do both the maximise turn around time and maintain good divs.
full member
Activity: 304
Merit: 102
I think we should focus on getting the mining farm to max capacity before actively trying to sell miners. At the current exchange rate the miners are highly profitable if Ken delivers on time, so we should take those profits for ourselves.

Gotta agree.  With bitcoin at $800 and most of thinking it will continue an upward trend, mining our own coins and earning dividends worth $100s and $1000s per week seems ideal to me. 
hero member
Activity: 487
Merit: 500
Are You Shpongled?
I think we should focus on getting the mining farm to max capacity before actively trying to sell miners. At the current exchange rate the miners are highly profitable if Ken delivers on time, so we should take those profits for ourselves.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do.
When I first invested in this company I was aware of the potential to earn divs from mining, but actually it was the profit from hardware sales that I thought was most exciting.

It seems these days that people think otherwise and this is in part to do with the price rise of Bitcoin.

So any thoughts on why this has changed?

Is anyone willing to speculate on mid to long term strategy? If Bitcoin continues to rise will there come a time when concentrating on selling hardware could be more profitable? 

Something I'm aware of is the more that Ken has to focus on delivering hardware to customers, the less attention our mining farm gets.  Will we be able to expand at a fast enough pace to prevent one side of the business becoming a detriment to the other?

Companies sell hardware because of the following reasons

Electricity/Cooling/Space requirements of running 1,000's of machines can be somewhat hard to overcome
You can only mine with machines that put you around 40% of the network at any given time due to people getting scared of a 51% attack but you can sell unlimited amounts of machines and make immediate money from that in USD as trying to sell thousands of coins and get them out of exchanges might be a bit tough if you did have 40% of the network.
These machines are prices at $130/Bitcoins
Bitcoins is closer to $800 now and instead of honoring the price point at which you are selling it becomes more profitable to mine unless you plan on raising the Miners price point then it could be more profitable to sell.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
myBitcoin.Garden
When I first invested in this company I was aware of the potential to earn divs from mining, but actually it was the profit from hardware sales that I thought was most exciting.

It seems these days that people think otherwise and this is in part to do with the price rise of Bitcoin.

So any thoughts on why this has changed?

Is anyone willing to speculate on mid to long term strategy? If Bitcoin continues to rise will there come a time when concentrating on selling hardware could be more profitable? 

Something I'm aware of is the more that Ken has to focus on delivering hardware to customers, the less attention our mining farm gets.  Will we be able to expand at a fast enough pace to prevent one side of the business becoming a detriment to the other?
full member
Activity: 240
Merit: 101
I don't know why but the term "additional resources" really does it for me.  Grin

This user is currently ignored.

Crumbs: reassuringly ignorable.

I think that's what you meant to say.

+1

Page 182 was actually refreshing in terms of meaningful conversation. Let's keep it going  Cheesy
full member
Activity: 169
Merit: 100
I don't know why but the term "additional resources" really does it for me.  Grin

This user is currently ignored.

Crumbs: reassuringly ignorable.

I think that's what you meant to say.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
myBitcoin.Garden
I don't know why but the term "additional resources" really does it for me.  Grin

It's because you're not too bright, zumzero.  So now you know.

What a party pooper.  I bet you're a bundle of fun on Christmas Day when the clowder are clawing at Daddies oedema shaped ankles and demanding their annual litter tray service.

If you don't let me have my fun now, later you may be forced into an agonising and brutal display of raw emotion when we get news that the ActM shareholders backed the right horse.   Kiss
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Swapping out 11k worth of shares for an 'on paper' miner that has no firm delivery date and will only make you 4k at best isn't very bright either.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
I don't know why but the term "additional resources" really does it for me.  Grin

It's because you're not too bright, zumzero.  So now you know.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
myBitcoin.Garden
I don't know why but the term "additional resources" really does it for me.  Grin
full member
Activity: 169
Merit: 100
Those chips could also be Klondike, not necessarily the new eASICs.

Do you know what the estimated hashrate for the Klondikes was?


I might be naive, but wasn't it 307 GH/s?

"An order of Avalon chips from steamboat's batch #1, for 68 Klondike-16 boards, rated at 68*16*282 = 307 GH/s;"

Exactly. That leaves over 2.5TH unaccounted for from "additional resources", and i doubt they're from the Klondikes.

+1

I can't think of any other reason than these are our chips...

Unless we're all being morons yet again.
full member
Activity: 240
Merit: 101
Ken: please let share-holders and investors know that all the shares are 'held OK', and nothing went missing-in-action.

"Sorry guys, my dog ate all the shares...  Undecided"

I understand the concern but if we trust Ken with our money, why is there so much apprehension with regards to the share transfers? If you followed the steps, you should be fine.
full member
Activity: 203
Merit: 100
Ken: please let share-holders and investors know that all the shares are 'held OK', and nothing went missing-in-action.
Sou
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
(Bitcoin related text here)
Those chips could also be Klondike, not necessarily the new eASICs.

Do you know what the estimated hashrate for the Klondikes was?


I might be naive, but wasn't it 307 GH/s?

"An order of Avalon chips from steamboat's batch #1, for 68 Klondike-16 boards, rated at 68*16*282 = 307 GH/s;"

Exactly. That leaves over 2.5TH unaccounted for from "additional resources", and i doubt they're from the Klondikes.
full member
Activity: 240
Merit: 101
Those chips could also be Klondike, not necessarily the new eASICs.

Do you know what the estimated hashrate for the Klondikes was?


I might be naive, but wasn't it 307 GH/s?

"An order of Avalon chips from steamboat's batch #1, for 68 Klondike-16 boards, rated at 68*16*282 = 307 GH/s;"
Sou
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
(Bitcoin related text here)
Those chips could also be Klondike, not necessarily the new eASICs.

Do you know what the estimated hashrate for the Klondikes was?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do.
The eASIC announcement didn't even come until Sept. 5th. This had to have been close to the time the NRE was paid.

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Al right!
Using september 4'th as base and adding 9 weeks gives us: November 6'th (Chip samples delivered).
Adding 12 weeks gives us: November 27'th (Low-volume chip production starting).
Adding 16-18 weeks: December 25'th - January 8'th, with observation to christmas holidays (Normal volume chip production).

Seems plausible,

Also note this is just when the chips arrive (Going to assume packaged and ready for mounting).
Then they have to be delivered to the Assembly House and put on boards. (Again assuming parts are on the PCBs and ready for chips already)
Then they have to be delivered to Ken and setup.

The above process can take 1-2 weeks as well so anyone trying to speculate should add that to their timelines as well after each batch.
full member
Activity: 203
Merit: 100
Those chips could also be Klondike, not necessarily the new eASICs.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
https://karatcoin.co
There's actually a lot of "news" out right now, it's just not announced. Allow me:

Over the last seven days we've collected: 10.32319126 BTC
That average leaves us at 1.47474160857143 per day over this seven day average.

Plug 1.7th/s in here: http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/. See what that nets a day.

"So what!", you say. Well, I believe that this is the halved rate of the whole for ActM. Observe:

By my calculations we're hashing ~1.8Th/s, on the 7 day average. Are you getting things figured out with the prototype? Can we expect it to be fully operational by the end of the week?



You forgot about the 50% hold back right?

If this is truly implying that I have only accounted for half of the hashrate then we are hashing @ ~1.7*2Th/s or 3.4TH/s. It also means we have a working prototype. Now, if I were Ken, when I knew that the test chips were working properly I'd send out my low production order to eASIC and get the ball moving...

So, how long has Ken known these test chips were working at spec?  Wink

Jump to: